Summer Slam was less than a week ago and already a lot has changed since the biggest event of the summer.
The debut of a new Wyatt Family member, the return of the Vigilante Sting and the re-emergence of the infamous Dudley Boys all headlined an explosive post- Summer Slam episode of RAW on Monday.
Never to be pinned again?
There has been a lot of progression in the feuds coming out of Summer Slam already but the one that hasn't moved on, was actually the main event.
JOIN THE DEBATE
Was the controversy at Summer Slam the right way to go? Join the debate by becoming a GMS writer HERE: http://gms.to/haveyoursay1
The Undertaker took on Brock Lesnar in Brooklyn on Sunday and managed to get the win despite the very controversial ending.
After it seemed that the Undertaker had tapped out to the Kimura lock which the referee didn't see, he nailed Lesnar with the low blow and locked him into the Hell's Gate submission which Lesnar would eventually pass out to.
The ending was without a doubt controversial and it has now led to many people questioning if the Undertaker has turned heel?
However the answer may be much more simple than that.
There is no doubt that over the last year, WWE have shaped Brock Lesnar into an unbeatable monster who can't be stopped.
He defended the WWE World Heavyweight Championship at the Royal Rumble with a broken rib but lost it at WrestleMania XXXI without being pinned and couldn't beat Seth Rollins at Battleground due to outside interference.
The idea of anyone pinning Lesnar is now almost far-fetched and that is a sentiment that the WWE also hold in mind.
Rumours are that the reason for the controversial ending to Summer Slam was because the WWE didn't want the Undertaker to pin Lesnar.
Just like the Undertaker will never be booked to lose at WrestleMania again, we have to question if Lesnar will ever be booked to be pinned again?
With the status of Lesnar now secured as the most powerful and dominant star in WWE, is there anyone on the roster who could pull off a pinfall victory over the Beast?
Lesnar does only compete on the big stage and his matches do always seem to contain some kind of controversy resulting in them being dubbed by Paul Heyman as 'can't miss'.
So is it more beneficial for the WWE to keep Lesnar's matches rare but full of controversy?